Featherstonia: An Occasional New Series?

I was very pleased with the reaction to the posting of the programme for the 1965 Military Festival at the Duke of York's HQ. As a result of this, Iain (The Mighty Albannach, no less) has offered to make some more of his personal collection of old documents available for sharing in this way, which is not only very generous, but also suits me very well for a number of reasons, since my painting efforts have stalled for the moment, and actual wargames are likely to be few and far between for a while. Thus I am delighted to take him up on his kind offer.

We'll see how this goes, but he has a good collection of wargames rules (by a number of authors) and of historical and wargaming notes, all of which were available as "handbooks" and could be ordered through Donald Featherstone's Wargamer's Newsletter back in the day. It is possible that some of this material has been collected into more modern publications, but at least you can be confident that the original documents posted here will have been proof-read at some time, which is not always the case elsewhere.

First off, then - appropriately enough - is DFF's very own Rules for Napoleonic Wargames. I believe the rules employed at the 1965 Waterloo game were a cut-down version of these. Please enjoy them, and please treat them with the respect they (and Albannach, and I!) are due. Potentially, there are some real goodies in the pipeline!

Thanks again, Iain!

Update to my C&C-based ECW Rules

This post is overdue - I was working on some changes back in April, but hadn't got the links formalised for Google Drive.

The latest version is 3.01 - as always, there is some typo-fixing, and I've simplified some rules because the (imagined) added cleverness proved to be outweighed by the extra complexity (constant theme).

One of the big changes is that I've now included a more-or-less coherent note on the use of my optional, dice-based Ramekin activation system with the ECW rules. This does a number of things, the chief of which is removal of the Command Cards from the game. Ver 3.01 of the rules also uses a coloured font to identify the parts of the rules which are changed in the absence of the Cards. I have been surprised to learn that a number of people actually use these rules now, and it is only right and proper that I should try to ensure that the "official" downloads are up to date.

The downloadable documents should now allow use of Ver 3.01 with the Command and Chaunce Cards or, as an alternative, the Ramekin system. In passing, Ramekin has proved (fortuitously!) to be absolutely invaluable for playing C&C Napoleonic games remotely, via Zoom, which is an accidental bonus I had not planned for!

As ever, please bear in mind that these rules are primarily for my own use, they are supported and maintained on an occasional, best-endeavours basis, and I don't really wish to hear how awful they are(!) - I'm delighted to discuss them if anyone has any suggestions which are consistent with what I have tried to achieve with them. Also - of course - if the links don't work properly, please do let me know! Google Docs and its offspring have always been pretty much intuitive in use, but I use them so infrequently that I have a tendency to forget best practice!

If you are interested, or want to update the versions you have, you will find the link in the top right corner of this screen.

Rules - Turn Sequences

I've recently been working on some wargame rules of my own (yet again), and I seem to have developed a bee in my bonnet about building them around the turn sequence from the old WRG 1685-1845 rules, which in the past impressed me greatly. It is (or was, at the time I was impressed), unusual in that moving is the last thing you do, including the declaration of the first half of any charges to contact you wish to make. Thereafter, reaction to those charges, defensive retaliation, the completion of the charges and the actual melees take place in your opponent's turn.

I thought that was clever - I confess I never used the full rules as written, because I found them tricky to get the hang of, and there were far too many lists and reaction tests for my liking. Anyway, since the spark had now glowed again, I thought I should make a more serious job of understanding them properly, so that I could maybe use the turn structure in my new game - I have to say that the WRG's rules sometimes rely heavily on your spotting the subjunctive verb in Paragraph 417 to appreciate the full beauty of the logic. [Also, over the years I have skipped past "jezails" in the combat factor lists more times than I could estimate, and I still don't know what a jezail is.]

This, of course, is a jezail

Again, I have found this quite tricky. My new rules were suddenly full of morale tests that I hadn't wanted, there were coloured counters all over the place, to show where you were up to with keeping track of routing units, and, since the game would collapse in a heap if you did anything out of the correct order, I had written out the turn sequence as a checklist.

In a recent email exchange with a fellow bloggist - a game designer of some repute, let it be said - he offered the view that the turn sequence has to be capable of being carried in your head - if you need a chart then there may be something seriously wrong. He is right - I guess I knew this, but I needed someone else to say it.

Lightbulb.

I have - all right, regretfully - dropped the WRG bits, and my new game is looking slimmer and more like my idea of a recreation immediately.

What is capable of being carried in the head, of course, also depends heavily on how the old head is performing, and I am aware that the passing years have made me less patient in this area, but I prefer to think that I have become more fussy about how a game should be, rather than simply more stupid. Other opinions probably abound.

I was joking about this with another friend (I am showing off here, since this means I must have at least two friends), and we agreed that a wallchart for the turn sequence in chess would be

(1) White moves
(2) Black moves
(3) go to (1)

I could probably post that as a download on boardgamegeek - now there's fame.

WSS Project - a little gentle rule-testing

It's possible to keep typing for ever without getting anywhere very definite, so tonight I spent a happy couple of hours trying out the new (developing) house rules for the WSS soldiers. Interesting, as always. I found that the principal game mechanisms need a bit of tuning, as you would expect, but the hard bit is getting the flow of the turn-sequence logical (and in a sensible order - better test to see if the attached general is still alive before we give a "+1" on the morale test for his presence...)

A lot to do, but this is a definite step forward, I think. It amuses me to claim that the rules are tried and tested - they are, in the sense that the morale rules mostly come from Charlie Wesencraft, the turn sequence from WRG 1685-1845, the combat rules are based on Neil Thomas (by way of Old Trousers' hexification experiments thereupon), the idea of a single number for unit effectiveness comes from Howard Whitehouse (and, I suppose, from Avalon Hill), the activation rules come from my Ramekin game, the movement and manoeuvre rules come from a computer-driven rule-set called Élan which I used successfully for solo games some years ago...

You get the idea, the only thing which is completely new in this recipe is the combination, and how many teaspoons of each. Anyway - so far so good. Some simplifications are needed, but I'm pleased - I'll carry on with this, and get on with refurbing the armies.

Something Old, Something New

I've been experimenting with base sizes and unit organisation - here's the first glimpse of a new project for me. This is the Bavarian Regiment D'Octfort, circa 1703. I have rebased them, and applied fresh (shiny) varnish and a replacement flag, but as far as possible the paintwork is the original from the 1970s. The figures are ex Eric Knowles, and my plan is to have enough fightable units to get some games going, quickly, and with as little work as possible. I have some Austrians on the bench now.

The figures are Les Higgins, vintage 1971 - small 20mm (about 1/76, I reckon). Old John can supply extra figures from this range, and I have some promising samples from Irregular and Lancer Miniatures - these other makes of figures will match best if I standardise on Higgins horses throughout. Anyway, early days yet - the first battalion is a prototype in a number of ways - so far so good, I think.

The 3-base organisation allows me to use Beneath the Lily Banners rules, but my first effort will be to develop my own rules which - you may be surprised to learn - are hex-gridded. The base sizes will allow a battalion to form a line 150mm wide, or a march column 150mm long - all of this should work well with my 180mm hexes.

Note that the command base has room for a dice frame

A Gentleman's War

I've been very much enjoying Howard Whitehouse's new book for my bedtime reading. Entertainingly written, and the game looks like fun - and also looks like it's versatile enough to cover a few periods with minor tweaking.

One small concern - has anyone played the game? - does anyone understand the card play? - even a bit? There must be something obvious I'm missing; that section seems to provide a lot of detail, but I seem to have missed the overall system. Sat-nav approach to wargames rules. I'll read it again...

Comfortably Familiar

I've had a relatively quiet week, so decided to do something about reading some of the books I've been acquiring. After some dithering about, just to be awkward, I picked on one I've had for years and years - Charles Grant's The War Game - I haven't read it for a long time, but recently I bought a couple of companion volumes produced by Charles Grant the Younger - The War Game Companion and The War Game Rules, so it seemed appropriate to have a look at all three together.

Thus I settled down with the original book, and I must say I'm really enjoying it. A nice, traditional, bottom-up development of how to play 18th Century wargames, starting from a consideration of how quickly men can march, and setting off at a comfortable, relaxed pace to cover the whole subject. Black and white photos of bounce-sticks, canister frames, huge regiments of free-standing Spencer Smith's. Brilliant. I have to say that I have no wish to play the actual game as described, but it is a very pleasant read - it's thorough, sensibly presented and written in an amiably genteel style, as is perfectly correct for its vintage. It is also, I freely admit, useful to revisit those fundamental assumptions and conventions which we have all taken for granted for so many decades.

I am interested to note that one of the more recent companion volumes discusses how the game has been adapted to use multiple bases - I must have a look at that. And then there is a discussion of campaigns. These rules have been in constant use and continuous evolution since 1971, when the original book was published, and they were already well played-in long before that, so we may safely assume that they work.

Anyway, in the meantime I'm quite happy with a glass of wine and my friendly old, non-threatening book. Very nostalgic.

***** Late Edit *****

There must be something in the wind - entirely coincidentally, I now realise that I have published this post almost simultaneously with a splendid commemoration of Young & Lawford's Blasthof Bridge game from Charge! on Wellington Man's most excellent Hinton Spieler blog- if you haven't seen it, go over there and enjoy it.  

******************

Reserve Chips in Ramekin (the Genie Delivers?)

New supplies of 18mm chips in two colours, and the requisite D3 to sort out the mysteries of off-table reserves. Hot from the Genie.

I've been doing some work on my Ramekin Napoleonic rules, to encourage the realistic use of off-table reserves. Ramekin is my house variant of Commands & Colors:Napoleonics - it uses the movement and combat systems from C&CN (with some minor changes) but replaces the Command Cards with a dice-based activation system which allocates Order Chips to units. The introduction of this hybrid game has gone pretty well to date, though my recent Neumarkt scenario got a little bogged down in the introduction of off-table reserves into the action. I have been thinking how to improve this problem, and I was delighted (and very surprised!) by the number of interesting contributions and ideas I received.

I am very grateful to Arlen, Dave, David, Chris, Chris, Mark, Peter, Dan, Ross and Rob (and certainly one or two others - if I've omitted you, you know who you are) for applying their very considerable intellect and gaming experience to the issue of my humble rules, and, especially, to Goya, for analysing my rambling draft, and to the Archduke, for coming up with the logical but ground-shaking idea that there should be two types of Order Chips - ordinary ones (as at present), and (exciting, new) Reserve Chips, which are a bit different, as I shall attempt to describe with some attempt at brevity. Thank you, gentlemen.

 

A proportion of this post is copied from an email exchange I had earlier today - the previous recipient may well recognise sections of the text - apologies, as necessary, but it seemed a shame to waste it! What I like about this is the simplicity - even I can understand it! No doubt some further tweaking will be necessary, but this seems to be shaping up, and it now needs a little playtesting.

Eventually there has probably been sufficient interest in this to justify a short blog post - it will mean little or nothing to most readers, but never mind. Here is what is beginning to look like The Answer (or the First Draft of The Answer...).

* Ramekin rules are pretty much unchanged, except there are now two colours of Order Chips - one colour is Reserve Chips.

* These Reserve Chips arrive by a slow trickle, controlled by the dice, rather like the Order Chips, but there are a couple of differences...

* If your army includes an off-table reserve (of any size) you get to roll an extra D3 along with your Initiative Dice each turn - it doesn't add to the Initiative Total - the only thing you can use it for is to generate Reserve Chips.

* All you can ever do with Reserve Chips is use them to move off-table units on to the table - you can double up these Reserve Chips if you have accumulated enough, to allow the reserves to travel a little further on to the table, but you can't use them for fighting, and once the reserve units are on the table you need normal Order Chips to do anything with them - which is in itself a good reason to wait a while before bringing them on. You can't change Reserve Chips into Order Chips. No.

* If any of your off-table reserves are delayed for any reason (such as the Prussians at Waterloo) then the scenario will include a rule to determine/restrict when they are allowed to come on.

* If you have Reserve Chips left after you've brought all your off-table units on, you can ditch them, and stop rolling the extra die, since it doesn't achieve anything.

* Ramekin already stipulates that normal Order Chips can be carried forward to the next turn if not used, subject to a maximum carry-forward of 5; Reserve Chips may be carried forward without limit. [I am thinking of also allowing Order Chips in the player's stash to be converted to Reserve Chips, without the option to change them back later, but haven't decided about this]

* [Designer's Note...] I have been nervous of creating gamey situations where (for example) a player may use the existence of a reserve as a crafty way to generate extra Order Chips for his army. I think the system set out here works for a number of reasons. I've also abandoned various ambitious plans to allow reserves to be activated by the surrender of accumulated Victory Points - not least because I was at a loss to explain what this represented in a real battle. Apart from the good sense of keeping the reserve fresh and safe, it requires some time to accumulate sufficient Reserve Chips to get a strategic advance organised, and also bringing on the reserve too early runs the risk that there won't be enough Orders to go round - when the army is getting worn out, some of the units will not be using Orders any more, so there should be spare to look after the reserve. The tactic of bringing on the reserve prematurely, to jam up the table when there are insufficient Order Chips to do anything with them looks (historically, I hope) like a bad one!

Anyway - it obviously needs a bit of testing. In the meantime I've taken delivery of a shipment of what spielmaterial.de (of Moenchengladbach) describe as Crusader-Dubloons - in two colours. These will result in the phasing out of my rather whimsical collection of blue Tesco customer tokens, which have featured on this blog in a number of conflicts of late - I shall miss them, I guess, but this looks a bit more professional.

C&CN "Garrison" Markers - the Miniatures Version

One of the additional rules which came out of the Generals, Marshals & Tacticians Expansion #5 to the GMT base game of Commands & Colors: Napoleonics was the concept of "Garrison" markers.

I've started using these fairly recently - for battles here we call them "Detachments" which is maybe a more logical name for them, but for the purposes of this note I shall call them Garrisons, to conform to the original rules.

The original rules section from Expansion #5 - there were some extra rules and afterthoughts added later by Richard Borg, and I've added some house clarifications of my own

It's a useful idea - to restate the key features, an infantry unit which has at least 2 blocks/bases remaining can leave behind one of these markers when it is ordered to move out of a BUA hex. The unit does not have to reduce its strength to do so - the detachments left behind are very small, so a unit can in theory leave behind a series of these. The marker can be ordered to fire or melee (though it may not move to do so), it can defend itself if attacked in melee - it has an allocation of 1 battle die. The Garrison does not have any of the characteristics of the unit which generated it, so it can't be classified as Old Guard, and it will always have muskets. It cannot move, cannot be joined by a Leader, does not count as support for friendly units. Since it cannot move, a retreat eliminates it, as does a single hit in combat. It cannot ignore a retreat flag for any reason. If it is joined by a friendly unit, or dislodged/defeated by the enemy it is removed from the table - no Victory Banners are associated with a Garrison or its demise. In melee, in addition to infantry and flag symbols, a Garrison is eliminated by a crossed-sabres symbol, even if it is fighting some unit type which normally does not get to count sabres (British Rifles being an example, or militia).

It goes without saying that a Garrison cannot form square, does not exist outside BUAs or similar hexes, cannot be rallied, cannot take ground if it manages to win a melee - there is almost no limit to the things a Garrison cannot do, since it is a marker and not a proper unit, but it is a useful little chap. It is a good way of avoiding that situation which happens in a lot of games where one side has vacated a village (say) but the enemy has not entered it or captured it yet - if a Garrison marker is left behind then there is no doubt who owns the village, if only until the next thing happens, and it does have some combat capability. If a Garrison is left in a BUA, the enemy can't just walk into it unopposed. The markers can be re-used indefinitely, but to keep the game sensible I am restricting supply to 3 such counters for each nation, so you can only have a maximum of 3 in play at one time - I am going to produce miniatures versions of these for France, Britain, Portugal, Spain, Austria, Prussia, Russia and Bavaria, but scheduling will probably be driven by upcoming battles. The current plan here is to refight Albuera the first weekend in March. This action involves BUAs (the village of Albuera) and those BUAs can change hands during the conflict, so it would be nice to have the French and British marker sets available - if the Spaniards or Portuguese need to leave a marker on that day, they can borrow the British ones.

The new French markers: ex-Eric Knowles voltigeurs on their special grey (BUA-coloured!) bases

I haven't been doing any painting for a couple of weeks, but I've now produced the French Garrison set. The British one should follow next week sometime. The figures in the picture may be of some interest - especially to older wargamers; these are Hinton Hunt French Elite Voltigeurs, in 3 different poses, and they were among some of the odds and ends from the collection of the late Eric Knowles. I only have a few of these, so it was pleasing to be able to give them a useful job. Eric had them rather nicely painted, so out of respect I've pretty much left them alone - a little touch-up on the worn bits and some fresh varnish and that's it. They may have quite a stressful future, but they look to be up for it!

You will not be surprised to learn that I have fitted the MDF bases with discs of magnetic sheet, so they can be stored and transported as necessary in the French artillery boxes. OCD never sleeps. I would worry about them if they were free to rattle about loose somewhere...

FK&P - Heavy Going to Start With

I've had a couple of sessions familiarising myself with the For King and Parliament rules. Slow going, thus far - of course, it is possible that I have finally become too old and stupid to learn anything new, but mostly I have been having problems with the rule book.

Early experience-gainer tests. Everything vanilla - all the units are seasoned, no terrain effects to worry about, and so on. If you screw your eyes up you may see the pencil lines, which will be gone by lunchtime today. 20mm soldiers, 7.5inch squares, half-size playing cards, buckets of counters and wooden cubes standing by.

I would hate to say anything rude or unfairly critical of this game, so I must state right away that the booklet is enthusiastically and engagingly written, the style is pleasing and (a true rarity!) it is grammatically correct and the spelling is good, and the whole production is very attractively laid out.

I am happy to accept that the evidence is that this is a very enjoyable game, and that I will get up to speed eventually, and all will become clear. Good. My problem, I think, is that I have not come to this game after playing To the Strongest, so I am not quite on the right wavelength to start with, and also the authors - who have definitely come from the direction of TtS! - obviously understand the game and know what they mean, but sometimes I found it hard to pick up the key elements I need to get started from what is a mixture of design points, examples (which are useful and entertaining, but a couple of them seem to contain errors - or at least points which I couldn't find in the main text), tables, illustrations and playing tips.

Portent? - the very first activation card I played in this game - ever - was an Ace, which is a very bad card for activation. It makes a welcome change from bad dice rolls.

There are a number of examples of special exceptions to standard rules, which seem to be mentioned once only - some of them do not seem to be reflected in the summary tables, and often I found that I was unable to find the reference when I searched for it. The impression gained is that a number of post-prototype fixes were put in, and that an editor should get his head in there before the 2nd Edition appears. I am used to things being cross-referenced - especially if they haven't been mentioned yet. On a few occasions I came across terms I hadn't seen before (or at least couldn't remember seeing!), which a few pages later were explained and defined. None of this is serious, but I've found it a bit tricky. I like to remember rules in terms of norms which usually apply, with the necessary exceptions as a short and manageable list - if there are real weird cases which don't happen very often, then they are the things you know you have to check in the rules as and when.

The Quick Reference Sheet reproduces full details of unit properties - all or nothing - and undoubtedly lists some key information, albeit in a rather lengthy and waffly style - QRS's are usually brief and punchy. Oh - and they should be complete  too - rules for shooting and melees only appear here in the QRS by implication - and artillery ranges aren't set out (I couldn't find them, anyway). Since I've now read through the rule book four times, I would expect to have a better grasp of what is needed. I'll definitely produce my own QRS - that's a priority - but for some of the key rule sections - activation, combat, saves - I'll produce very short notes and tables of my own, with stuff explained as departures from a basic standard. I haven't got room in my head for amusing stories about all the features of Swedish horse - though I can maybe retrofit that sometime later.

So I shall plug away, but there is going to be a power of typing going on to get me up to speed! One further thing which is gently catching me out at present is that some of the TtS jargon is counter-intuitive to a newbie. In FK&P, "hits" means what in other games I would regard as "strength points" (or even "blocks"!), "disorders" means "losses", and there are a few other conventions I just have to get used to - OK - I can manage that. I also had difficulty finding the exact timing of tests for officer casualties, and thus far I haven't found out how far a melee attacker has to pull back if he doesn't eliminate the enemy.

Last night I did some cavalry melees, which were slow because I haven't got the hang of everything I need to know yet. First things I have to fix are:

(1) the tabletop - my original intention was to put pencil lines on to mark complete squares, pick out the corners of the square cells in black Sharpie pen, and then paint out (or erase) the construction lines. After I'd got the boards marked up, I reckoned I'd give it a go with the pencil lines still in place - they are not very visible anyway. Bad news is that it became obvious last night that the playing cards are going to get very grubby with raw pencil on the table (however discreet), so I have set about painting over the construction lines. We'll just have corners, as recommended, and as I originally intended.

(2) the half-size playing cards are OK - it is necessary to work at keeping things tidy and organised, or the result is a terrible mess, but I expected that. However, in the absence of proper counters to keep track of ammunition, "dash" (for horse), pursuits, "disorders" and all the other things you need to keep track of (and this is before you get to whether the cavalry are badly mounted, whether the units are raw/seasoned/veteran, the characteristics of individual leaders, the "gallant gentleman" classification...), I used a variety of coloured tiddlywinks, which won't stack without falling over and spreading about, which are not really very easy to handle and which look just awful. I can't be doing with very much of that, so some quick progress with proper tracking systems is necessary, or I'm going to shelve this. I'm thinking about it, and have had some useful ideas from commenters (thank you, chaps) and via email.

That's about it for the moment. I've started touching-out the pencil lines, and I'll do a bit of typing of CONCISE tables, and I'll be back on to trying out aspects of the game this evening.

Lots of Django Reinhardt on the CD player at the moment - that keeps the painting speed up! Just thought I'd mention it. Oh yes, and while I'm digressing, I've finally chucked out the remainder of the Nescafe - we bought two large jars of bog-standard Nescafe instant coffee a while ago, because they were on special offer with some rather handsome mugs. I am afraid that I do not like Nescafe - I realise this is entirely my own problem. I could, of course, have disposed of the actual coffee and simply regarded that as part of the cost of the mugs, but - no - this particular mug is far too mean for that. Eventually, halfway through the second jar, I have disposed of it. To be more accurate, my wife got tired of my complaining about it, so she threw it out on my behalf, and I've gone back to my preferred Douwe Egberts instant. Good. A bit like the relief when you stop banging your head on the wall. Some strange ritual, suffering, so as not to waste anything. Hmmm.

For King and Parliament

Plain side of the boards now have squares on

So what's all this, Foy?

Well, in common with a lot of other chaps I have been looking at the For King and Parliament rules, which are a recent ECW extension of the popular To the Strongest Ancient/Medieval game, and I have to say I am very impressed.

I am pretty comfortable with my own current C&CN-based ECW game, which handles very large games splendidly, but there are a few characteristic subtleties of pike & shot warfare which I have struggled to build into such a high-level rule set. Having received good reports of To the Strongest, I purchased the FK&P rules, and am currently on my 4th read-through. They look good. They seem to offer a very entertaining game, not too complex, the philosophy of which is very much in the spirit of how I like wargames to be, and they handle some of these aforementioned subtleties rather nicely. Hmmm.

I have reached the point where it would make sense to try the game out. My two overriding concerns are whether it really would handle what I regard as a large battle, and - to be frank - I am a bit alarmed by the amount of clutter associated with it. I don't care for roster systems, so having all necessary information on the table, with the units, is very acceptable. On the other hand, this game involves copious use of playing cards (it is a dice-free system, though there are dice-based alternatives), ammunition chits of three varieties (pistol, musket and artillery -  why three varieties? - is this because infantry may have light artillery attached?), "dash" chits for cavalry, "untried" markers, pursuit pointers, victory "medals", disorganisation chits (= losses in the terminology of most other games) and assorted information about specific leaders and units. I have obtained some half-sized playing cards, but I am concerned that all this stuff might reduce the tabletop (especially if the tabletop has me attached) to a state that in a less correct age would have been termed as like a tart's handbag.

I'm working on it - I have consulted the Jolly Broom Man, who is also looking to adopt these rules, and he has some constructive thoughts on how it may be possible to reduce the depth of laser-printed MDF counters so that one may see over the top.

First practical issue for me is that the game uses a square grid. I have no problem with this at all - I am very much in favour of grids - except that I do not have such a thing handy. Well, I didn't - I do now. I gave some thought to tweaking the game so it would work with hexes (I have boards, scenery, all sorts for a hex-based game). The Northumbrian Wargamer's excellent blog explains the adaptation to hexes, and it seems to work OK. I decided against that, to give the game a fair trial in its intended form.

I came up with a simple way of adding a square grid to the reverse (plain) side of my existing warboards - a solution which could be quickly and easily painted over if I lose interest in the idea, which understates the square pattern in the interests of avoiding dizzy turns, and is subtle enough to be ignored if an un-gridded field is needed. The picture makes it clear what I have done - this is one of the table sections, freshly marked out on the reverse side. To allow room for the 60mm square bases I use with my ECW troops, I settled on 7½ inch squares. This may seem like an odd size, but it works OK with my unit sizes, and it very conveniently divides into a 5-foot table width to give 8 squares deep. I have marked out the boards so that I can have a 12 x 8 cell standard table, or 15 x 8 if I add in the (5th) extension board . That's all fine - I haven't tried it yet, but it seems workable. I will have a problem to solve for roads (which run through the centres of cells, but I don't have any suitable bits for 8" squares) and streams (which run around the edges of squares, a system which seems more intuitively comfortable than the C&CN arrangement, but - again - I will need to set something up). Most of the other scenic bits I can probably hash together from what I already have.

Despite my (predictable?) carping, nit-picking approach, I am enthusiastic. If the rules really do allow very big games to be fought then I am ready to make FK&P my ECW rules of choice. If they work well, but don't handle anything as big as Marston Moor (etc), then I can still turn my boards over to the hex side and use the C&CN-based game for special whoppers. A lot will depend on how comfortable I am with the amount of clutter involved.

From being the only wargamer in the known universe who uses 7-inch hexes, I have moved on to be the only one to use 7½-inch squares. Whether or not this is progress will reflect how the test games go.

Hielan' Coos - and the Ramekin

Moo!

First off, I must wish everyone a happy and comfortable Christmas - all the very best to you and yours. Here's a suitably frozen picture of some Scottish cattle. Tourist stuff, but cute.

I also thought I'd take the opportunity to put out the current draft of my Ramekin add-on for Commands & Colors: Napoleonics. In truth, "add-on" is not ideal phrasing, since the Ramekin game is a simplification. As I attempt to explain in the note, this is not intended to replace C&CN, it is merely a variation to cope with games where the left/centre/right section cards are not appropriate, or where the battle requires a lot of preliminary movement to develop the armies, or where the game is so large that some streamlining of the activation system helps to push it along. What I have is still a working draft, so it will certainly change further, but a number of people have asked me about it.

Replacement of the Command Cards with a dice-based activation system feels a bit like a sell-out, and I had all sorts of ideas for making the dice system very scientific, possibly utilising the army structure - the Tempo Points system from Polemos' General de Division was a likely candidate (I've always liked that) - but in the end I decided simple is good, at least for starting with, so the system at present may be described as crude-but-fast. This may get improved a bit as I build some more experience, but it gets me up and running.

The scaling-back of the effect of ranged musketry is an experiment. I am keen not to destroy the balance of the game, but, as published in C&CN, musket fire at 2-hex range is about as effective as melee combat, which has always bothered me rather. Let's see how we get on with this. I've had a great many games where attacks get shot to pieces before the attackers can even get to close range - that doesn't seem to correspond completely with history. Anyway, let's see how I get on with the tweak. If I can get the changed version of Google Drive to work, you should find the note here.

If you'd like to discuss the Ramekin, or make suggestions, or share you own experiences with it, please get in touch, but if you think it sucks then please keep it to yourself! Also, before anyone asks, I have no intention of publishing or maintaining a set of scenarios for Ramekin!

Have an excellent holiday, everyone.

Rules Testing - Battle of Albuera (16th May 1811)

Godinot's brigade have a think about their diversionary attack on the village - Von Alten with the KGL light infantry are in residence...

One of my projects at present is to develop a tweaked version of Commands & Colors: Napoleonics for in-house use. This game is intended to work (quickly, and simply, and without ambiguity) for very large battles, for battles which require large, grand-tactical movement of troops (such as off-table reserves), and for games which for other reasons do not lay out logically in the conventional C&CN, across the table, left/centre/right configuration - end-to-end-of-the-table battles, or oddities like the tactical bits of sieges are examples.

The tweaked rules are currently still in a state of flux - the main features are that they do not use the C&CN cards (they use a dice-based activation/initiative system), and they do not enforce strict alternation of moves, but they do use (most of) the main C&CN movement and combat systems. Until they are more stable, I don't really want to say too much about the rules themselves, though I will make some observations of a general nature at the end of this post. The important thing I wish to make clear at the moment is that the tweaked version is not intended as an improvement on original C&CN, nor a correction; it is merely a modified cousin of the game to suit specific kinds of wargames that I seem to be very interested in, so there is no need for anyone to rush to defend the original game, nor to pitch in from the other side, to write it off. Oh yes - my working title for the modified game is "Ramekin". This has no special significance or merit apart from the fact that it amuses me, and it stops me calling it "Vive l'Empereur" or "The Vivandiere's Moustache" or similar.

These rules, in their evolving form, were recently used for the Eggmuhl game here, and for the demo game I set up for my aunt (yes, all right, all right).

This midweek I had planned to set up a solitaire playtest game to do some more refinement (or, as is often the case, to abandon some of the most recent brilliant innovations, since they might simply be a waste of time!). Playtesting is a necessary investment of effort, of course, but playtesting on a solo basis has hazards of its own, since the writer knows what he intended the rules to mean, and how they were supposed to work, and will tend to fail to spot the big holes in them during solo play. Thus I was doubly delighted to have a collaborator yesterday - Count Goya came to help out.

I set up a biggish game based on Albuera, which is a battle of which I had limited understanding previously, and one which is noted for the intensity of the fighting, and the fact that it could have worked out in a number of ways - in fact you might say that it was several different battles, fought successively, in different directions.

I did a lot of reading (so did Goya), and set up a game on my bigger (10'4" x 5', 17 hexes x 9) tabletop. I did some work to sort out which bits of the complex OOBs actually appeared in the field, and - though the numbers of units I fielded didn't match the original battle, the implied numbers of troops were pretty close. [Thus, for example, Girard's Division in my game was 5 battalions, which is about 4000 men, which is correct, though in the original battle these men were spread over 9 battalions.]

I read over, but did not use, the published C&CN Albuera scenario. My game was somewhat larger, and my map was rather more closely based on fact (again, this is not a criticism of anything). We started the game at the point where Beresford (or someone on Beresford's staff) notices that the French are not really serious about attacking the town of Albuera itself - this is a diversion, and the main part of Soult's army has performed a smart left hook, so the principal attack is on the Spanish troops on the Allied right. Thus Stewart's 2nd Division, with Colborne's brigade in front, are sent marching to the right, to cover the Spaniards' exposed flank.

Albuera is renowned for having some key incidents which may not fit with normal wargame rules. Most famously, the French light cavalry - notably the Vistula Lancers - wrecked Colborne's troops, who failed to form square (because Stewart and/or Beresford ordered them to stay in line to maximise firepower, or because there may or may not have been a violent rainstorm which obscured their view and damped their powder, or because they didn't expect the cavalry to be out there on the flank, or for some other reason). It is possible to incorporate some chance card type decision point - I confess I don't care for rigging a game in that way. As a gesture towards history, we adopted a simple dice-test for any infantry wishing to form square - just for the day.

I'm not going to step through the AAR in more detail than comes from the photos - we were not attempting to re-enact anything - Albuera served primarily as an entertaining context for some playtesting. There were some interesting historical parallels in the game - some worked the opposite way to the real battle, of course, and some worked the "correct" way, if in a slightly different manner. We ran out of time, though the French appeared to be winning when it was time for dinner. Whether or not the Allies realised they were beaten, of course, is the critical issue...

Overall view from behind the French left flank at the start of the game. In the foreground is the left hook - La Tour-Maubourg with the cavalry, the divisions of Girard (in front) and Gazan (behind), then Werle's brigade in the centre and, at the far end, Godinot's diversionary assault on the village

View from behind the French right flank - on the Allied side, Karl Von Alten has a KGL brigade in the village, and behind him are Portuguese troops (Otway's cavalry and Harvey's large infantry brigade from 6th Divn); I'll describe the other end of the Allied set-up in a moment...

...and here you are - Zayas' Spaniards in line in the centre of the table, with Stewart's 2nd Division marching to their right behind the Spaniards, to cover the flank. On my game system of replicating the numbers of troops rather than the number of units, Stewart's command comprises Colborne's Brigade (in front, 3 battalions), then Hoghton's (2 bns), then Abercrombie's (2 bns). In rear of them is the 1st brigade (Myers) of Cole's 6th Divn, and beyond them we are back to Harvey's Portuguese (who received no orders throughout the day!)

Pin-up unit - the dreaded Vistula Lancers. In fact they had a remarkably bad day, and were eliminated very quickly. So much for history.

The French cavalry - Vistula boys at the front, then 2 units of chasseurs, then 2 of dragoons - at this point, they were opposed only by a weak brigade of Spanish light cavalry, so they chanced their arm...

... one of the chasseur units and the lancers moved forward to deal with the Spanish horse, and as a result of some of the most outrageous dice-rolling seen for a while the French were repulsed heavily, and the headlining lancers were eliminated, and thus would not get to meet the Buffs later.

Over on the Allied left, and in the centre, the Portuguese still haven't moved, neither have Myers' brigade from Cole's force, and Stewart's boys are making very slow progress towards the right.

Apparently not convinced about the benefits of hanging round demonstrating, Godinot's force gained a foothold in the village  - these are more Poles, the 4eme Vistule - but took a bit of a hammering for their trouble, and gave up on the idea thereafter. In theory there was a Victory Point available for occupation of the village, but after this early effort the KGL were left in peace.

Meanwhile, on the right, Colborne's brigade gets moving. On the tabletop, Colborne's boys were 3 battalions of old (proper 20mm) Lammings, and pretty shiny, too. Since my collection doesn't include the correct units for Albuera, there was some role-playing - notably our "Buffs" were actually a battalion of the 61st Foot (South Gloucestershire), but at least their flag was the right colour.

The firefight - Colborne's chaps appear on the right flank - not quite in the historic manner, and free from cavalry interruptions for the moment. In fact they didn't do very well when they got there - it was a nasty exchange though.

Early stages - Allies slightly ahead - 1 VP for holding the village, and one of the others must be for whacking the lancers. 11 VPs for the win was the order of the day.

Allied right flank isn't looking very clever, and Cole and the Portuguese are still mostly rooted to the spot on the far side. After a slow start, Girard is pressing the Spanish infantry.

Gazan's Division, behind Girard's, watches the attack develop in front. Both Girard and Gazan are prominent hat-wavers. Famous for it.

Back at the village, Godinot's demonstration is over; the combined battalion of grenadiers is sulking after suffering 3 bases-worth of casualties, the light infantry is in the wood, and the battered Poles are in another wood to the left, out of picture. The artillery can't see much point in carrying on wasting orders by firing, so they all hope their job is done and that Soult will win the day elsewhere.

Eventually, of course, the Spanish cavalry on the Allied right got their come-uppance, and were sent packing, and here General Loy, the brigadier, has a Ponsonby moment, as the French dragoons pursue him. Amazingly, they failed to kill or capture him (i.e. they couldn't roll a single crossed-sabres symbol on a total of 8 dice) and thus he escaped, choosing to leave the table just to deny the French the VP they would get if they did for him.

Better fortune for the Allies in the centre - combined-arms attack by one of Hoghton's battalions and Miranda's Spanish battery does some fearsome damage to one of Girard's regiments. All a bit late, really.

Late view from the Allied right shows that their right wing has mostly disappeared, and the left wing has hardly moved. This was just about dinner-time - the scoreboard showed the French leading by 10 points to 6, so they had more or less won.

Final view across towards what was, in fact, Beresford's position from the day before the battle. Beresford is going to get a dreadful roasting from Wellington, who even loaned him The Tree to  stand next to, as you see. On the far left you can see one of the ramekins (to hold initiative dice and order chips) from which the game gets its working title.

 Many thanks to Goya for his company and enthusiasm, and for helping out with the analysis. The game is shaping up nicely, and is a lot of fun, but we need some more work on getting the effect of musketry in balance with history, and to refine the use of the Order Chips (thanks to Tesco for the chips, by the way).

That's enough about that, I think - you'll hear more of the Ramekin soon, I'm sure.